Liebstöckl regrets having annoyed Schenker by unwantedly disclosing his name as
author of Harmonielehre in the Illustrirtes Wiener Extrablatt, promises to write about it
"conscientiously," and disclaims being a Reger adherent.

Schenker makes a first approach to Rudorff; it concerns interpretation of a
passage in Chopin's Ballade No. 2, Op. 38; — He asserts his belief in consulting -- and
teaching students to consult -- only original sources, and in the Urtext
principle.

Schenker reports progress on his Kontrapunkt. — The main problem in music is
"how length can be produced." — He recollects his love for the pious Bruckner, and his
admiration for the latter's music, but speaks of its "defects," comparing the music
favorably with that of Tchaikovsky. Bruckner's stumbling block was form.

Hertzka complains at the embarrassment that Schenker has caused him over the
Instrumentations-Tabelle, and proposes releasing the Table in two versions. — He proposes
that Schenker edit Book II of the Well-tempered Clavier in the manner of
Busoni.

Schenker agrees to the Instrumentations-Tabelle being published without his newly
written Introduction. — He declines the proposal to edit the Well-tempered Clavier Book II for
the new Akademie, offerin alternative suggestions and observations on Busoni's
editing.

Schenker raises again the splitting of Kontrapunkt into two half-volumes, or
even four installments. — He reports that his Beitrag zur Ornamentik has been adopted by the
Academy of Music, despite his being in a constant state of feud with all officialdom. — The
Academy's Director is a supporter of his theory. — Schenker outlines how earlier works of
his have become influential. — His Kontrapunkt is "eagerly awaited" and will be the "leading
work" on the subject; he argues the case for splitting the work on "psychological" and
"technical" grounds.

Schenker, on receipt of the score of a Rudorff choral work, praises its
textural clarity and melodic articulation, comparing them favorably to the writing of the
current generation. — He reports the success of his own recent theory works, and inroads
made into the Vienna Academy for Music and Performance Art.

Schenker resists attending a meeting with Hertzka and von Wöß regarding the
printing of his edition of the Chromatic Fantasy & Fugue; asserts his rights as an
author to control over his own material; and makes claims for the introduction to his
Instrumentations-Tabelle, which was not accepted for inclusion in 1908
reprinting.

Schenker writes scathingly of UE's business practices; describes his
counter-tactics, and his experiences over Niloff, Instrumentations-Tabelle. He will read all of
Halm's writings and asks for a reading-list

Schenker returns the article by Maurice Kufferath and comments on it critically.
-- Beethoven did give phrase-markings, thus Schenker advocates inserting fingering but not
additional phrase-marks. -- Diatribe against Hans von Bülow's editions and those who have
emulated him.

Schenker writes of the deteriorating intellectual conditions in Germany and
Austria with respect to other nations, and of the devastating political and psychological
consequences. Schenker praises Halm's Klavierübung for its sensitivity to voice leading, and
speaks of it as an antidote to the decline of musical literacy. He hopes to talk with Halm about
these matters when he moves to Germany.

Reflecting on the difficulty of finding housing and provisions, and on the recent
German federal elections, Dahms asks whether mastery of chorale and fugue is to be obtained
solely by exercises in the manner of [E. F.] Richter and others. — He inquires whether Schenker
knows Kurth's Grundlagen des linearen Kontrapunkts, and whether there are any worthwhile
[musical] people in Salzburg.

Deutsch offers to provide several books to Schenker instead of two or three hardback copies of the
"Moonlight" Sonata edition, and then details several misprints and factual errors in Romain Rolland's biography
of Beethoven.

Schenker returns materials for the Fifth Symphony article, reports a delay in
providing information for the facsimile edition of the "Spring" Sonata, and complains that he
has futilely lavished time on the purification of the German language for the second edition of
Die letzten fünf Sonaten ... Op. 109. — He agrees in principle to Hertzka's idea of an
"Urlinie-Ausgabe" of the Beethoven sonatas, and agrees to announce it in Tonwille 2, but asks
how the first seventeen sonatas are to be done retrospectively, and rejects the suggestion that
his pupils might make the preparatory graphs.

Invoice from Deutsch's bookshop (Seidel'sche Buchhandlung) for works by Mozart and Brahms, and a
book by Hildebrand, which also shows a credit remittance for one copy of Schenker's facsimile edition of
Beethoven's "Moonlight" Sonata.

Schenker acknowledges receipt of two booklets on youth and the new republic,
returns them, comments on them critically: idealistic German democrats desire maximal
remuneration with minimal work; illustrates point by difficulties with maids in Schenker
household; German democrats naively overestimate social and intellectual status of non-German
commoners (French, British, American); Schenker decries cosmopolitanism and those Germans who
advocate individuality at the expense of society; Schenker praises the fascists as countering
communism and social leveling, compares Mussolini's Italy favorably with present-day
Germany.

Schenker reports the imminent publication of Tonwille 3, and some new publishing
ventures, including a (new) edition of music by C. P. E. Bach and an "Urlinie Edition" of the
Short Preludes by J. S. Bach.

Having settled into country life in the Tyrol, Schenker returns to his work, in
particular to the ongoing battles with Hertzka over the publication of Der Tonwille. He asks
Violin’s opinion about a subscription plan for a periodical that would appear four times a year
(instead of the current two), and hopes that his friend might spare a few days to visit him in
Galtür.

Schenker describes his efforts to make Der Tonwille more widely read, through its
distribution by his pupils and its display in music shop windows. He needs more help from pupils
and friends with the dissemination of his work, but complains that Hans Weisse has let him down
on more than one occasion by not writing about his work. Finally, he asks Violin’s advice about
whether he should accept an invitation to speak at a conference in Leipzig, or whether he should
simply stay at home and continue to write.

Halm has sent the published score of a string quartet to Schenker. —Patronage has
enabled him to publish three volumes of compositions; reports on current and past composition
activities and publications. —Discusses what he has learned from Schenker's theories, and
questions whether it would be a fault were Bruckner's symphonies not to contain the Urlinie;
Halm's book on Bruckner's symphonies has gone into its second edition. —Halm suspects that
Schenker may not "agree with" his compositions, and asks whether Schenker wishes to receives
further scores. —Halm considers socialism a "historical necessity."

In a wide-ranging letter, Schenker expresses his joy at Karl Violin’s improving
health, and goes on to mention a number of personal successes he has lately had, including a
visit from Paul von Klenau to take advice for a forthcoming performance of Beethoven’s Missa
solemnis. He has also had some unexpected support from his publisher, who wants to expand Der
Tonwille to a quarterly publication. He is planning to take part in a series of charity concerts
(three Haydn piano trios), and has heard that Clemens Kraus and Hans Knappertsbusch are
overtaking Furtwängler as conductors in Vienna by accepting more modest fees.

Schenker has heard nothing from Eugen Steinhof; — he commends Hammer's
reaction to Halm's work, and comments unfavorably on the latter's musicianship, character,
and opinions; — he writes disparagingly of Robert Brünauer.

Halm offers to send two of his books in return for Schenker's Opp. 109, 110, 111;
he discusses the role of improvisation in his own music; he seeks "corporeality" in music, and
its absence in Brahms troubles him; argues the case for Bruckner; asks Schenker to choose a
passage exhibiting non-genius in his or Oppel's music and discuss it in Der
Tonwille.

Schenker reports continuing trouble with Hertzka, especially over delays to the
publication of Tonwille 5 and 6, which were supposed to appear the previous year, and is
beginning to think about legal action. Hertzka has made his position so difficult that he feels
obliged to turn down Max Temming's offer of direct financial support for his work. He asks
Violin to help find a post in Hamburg for Carl Bamberger, a gifted pupil who, though he
neglected his piano studies for a while, is keen to make up for lost time. Finally, he asks if
Violin received any of the four volumes of the Beethoven piano sonata edition.

Violin acknowledges receipt of Tonwille 5 and the Beethoven sonata edition. In
the former, he finds the graphs of the short preludes by Bach more difficult than anything that
Schenker has previously done. He will write to Bamberger with the offer of help (in finding an
accompanist post in Hamburg). In response to a question on the "Appassionata" Sonata from one of
his pupils, he offers an explanation for the falling direction of the transitional theme
(measures 24-30) and its reappearance in the development section (measures 94-100) in inverted,
ascending form; he asks if this interpretation is sensible.

Schenker confirms Violin's interpretation [given in his previous letter] of the
"Appassionata" Sonata, and describes continued difficulties with Hertzka. Herman Roth has
written to say that he and his son are using Schenker's analyses of Bach preludes in their
counterpoint classes, and expresses the hope that one day they will continue Schenker's work
independently.

In response to matters raised by Halm in two previous letters, Schenker discusses
figuration, distinguishing between that which works only on the surface and that which arises
out of the middle and background, drawing on primal intervals. He also concedes that he heard
Bruckner improvising, and criticizes it adversely. He refers to Reger, and outlines plans for
forthcoming volumes of Der Tonwille.

Asks Halm to send some of his chamber music to Rudolf Pollak, with prospect of
performance of the A major string quartet. —Deplores current situation over Sofie Deutsch
stipends. —Reports difficulties with UE and intention to change publisher.

Schenker names ten universities that should receive complimentary copies of Der
Tonwille, explaining that university music departments (Seminare) are more suitable recipients
than conservatories and other types of music schools. With 1924 coming to an end, he will resign
from UE and shift publication of Der Tonwille to Piper or Drei-Masken Verlag in Munich. The
latter have agreed to publish his study of Beethoven's Sonata Op. 106

Schenker, repeating some of the points made in earlier letters, continues to give an account of
Hertzka's dishonest dealings with him over Der Tonwille and asks Violin to give him an accurate count of the
subscriptions that Max Temming paid for in the distribution of free copies of the journal to university music
departments. He asks if Violin suspects that anti-Semitism lurks behind some of the critical notices of his recent
concert. Finally, he mentions an article in Die Musik by Paul Bekker that numbers Schenker among the hermeneutists;
the same issue contains a review of Der Tonwille, by Max Broesicke-Schon, disputing the supreme genius of the
canonic composers.

Schenker thanks Violin for his recent letter (and enclosure), which contains
evidence of Hertzka's false calculations of subscriptions to Der Tonwille – this letter in stark
contrast to the actions of his pupils Weisse and Brünauer, who had given more support to the
publication of Weisse's recently published vocal quartets than to his writings. Leaving Der
Tonwille behind, which has earned him little money and caused him much misery, he has written a
lengthy study of Bach's solo violin works, which will be published in the first volume of Das
Meisterwerk in der Musik, which will include a critique of Ernst Kurth's Grundlagen des linearen
Kontrapunkts.

Continuing the story of the ongoing financial battle against Hertzka and
Universal Edition, Schenker thanks Violin for providing confirmation of the subscriptions paid
for by Max Temming, then recounts that, at a meeting with Hertzka and his bookkeeper, the
order-book for Der Tonwille had several pages torn out. Schenker is upset that his lawyer Dr.
Baumgarten, though an old friend, is not fully supportive of his position and would prefer seek
a compromise with Hertzka; this, Schenker feels, would rob him of much of his hard-earned
royalties, especially from the Beethoven sonata edition. He now asks Violin to find a contact –
outside Hamburg – who would be willing to order nine copies of Tonwille 1, as evidence that this
issue is still in demand, despite Hertzka's claims to the contrary. He has attended a
performance of Hans Weisse's Sextet, of which he found the variation movement and the trio
section of the scherzo to be the most satisfactory parts.

Van Hoboken reports on his recent travels, describing the house that he has
rented for a year in Vienna; he is to register in Vienna for nine months for study purposes; he
thanks Schenker for the plan of work he has sent, and will start lessons with Schenker on
October 13, 1925; encloses $60 in advance monthly payment.

Schenker agrees to to teach Violin's pupil Agnes Becker twice a week, as soon
as she is ready to come to Vienna. He reports Furtwängler's disillusionment with modern
music, and notes that Weingartner and Julius Korngold have expressed similar sentiments. He
is not optimistic that humanity in general will truly understand the classics, which
underscores the important of his (and Violin's) mission.

Finding his name mentioned adversely in Meisterwerk 1, Hindemith writes that
he has always striven to fulfill in his own work the fundamental truths that are stated in
Schenker's books. He encloses two scores, and is convinced Schenker will find the Urlinie in
them.

In response to Hindemith's letter of October 25, 1926, Schenker's 15-page first
draft states his preference for a meeting with Hindemith in Vienna. Schenker thinks differently
from Hindemith: the notion of a "good musician" is a delusion; artistic property is comparable
with material property; the music of today is quite different from that of the past, the rules
of the masterworks do not govern it, hence it is not art at all. Schenker reserves the right to
speak his own mind.

Deutsch thanks Schenker for his recent communications, including a copy of the
contract with Drei Masken Verlag for the Meisterwerk Yearbook, and asks for a copy of
relevant extracts from the correspondence with the publishers. He reports progress in the
establishment of a Photogram Archive at the Austrian National Library, with the cooperation
of Dr Robert Haas and financial support from Anthony van Hoboken; similar plans to
photographically reproduce autograph manuscripts are underway at the Beethoven House in
Bonn, and (for manuscripts of Bach and Handel) also in England. He advises Schenker that
proofs will start arriving from the printing-house Waldheim in a few weeks, and expresses
his delight in being able to assist Schenker in the promotion of his work.

Hoboken had to cancel his planned visit to John Petrie Dunn because of illness. —
He reports on library visits in London and Paris, discusses manuscripts and conditions for
photography, purchases. — He plans no further trips this season.

Replying to Violin's previous letter, Schenker expresses surprise about (Egon)
Pollak's enthusiasm for C. P. E. Bach's Double Concerto. He also expresses uncertainty about
whether to accept an honor from the Academy of Arts and Science in Vienna. A translation and
adaptation of part of his Counterpoint, vol. 2, has been prepared; and Herman Roth's book on
counterpoint has also been published. He sends little Karl a picture of himself, and leaves
space for Violin's sister Fanny to add a short greeting.

Thanking Halm for his Beethoven book, he believes that their misunderstandings
could be removed and hopes Der freie Satz will help bring that about; gives order of publication
for Meisterwerk II and Der freie Satz, and compares his "Das Organische der Fuge" with the work
of others on Bach. — Schenker took no part in the Vienna Beethoven festival. — Describes his
correspondence with Hindemith.

Hoboken reports on meeting with Furtwängler regarding the Photogrammarchiv, and
expresses the hope that it will be possible to interest Furtwängler in performance according to
the sources in the Archive; he encloses the final version of the "Aufruf" for the Archive, and
discusses negotiations with the Austrian National Library and Ministry of Education. — Comments
on Oppel's plan to teach in Leipzig. — Agrees to Schenker's lesson plan and fee for 1927/28. —
Describes his travel plans, which include meetings with Louis Koch in Frankurt, Ludwig
Schiedermair in Bonn, contact with John Petrie Dunn in England, C. S. Terry in Scotland, and
Maurice Cauchie in Paris, and photographing [of sources] at the [Paris] Conservatory.

Hoboken has met a violinist, Dr. Loewenstein, who consults early editions and
manuscripts for performance purposes, and who cites Otto Klemperer as interpreting from early
sources. -- Gives addresses for forthcoming travels.

Owing to a "complete breakdown," Violin is recovering at a sanatorium in
Schierke, from where he writes. In response to Schenker's previous postcard, Violin had
written more than once to Prof. [Fritz?] Stein for the return of the manuscript of a Handel
arrangement by Schenker, and he will chase him up in August. A pupil of his, Harry Hahn, has
taken upon himself to lecture on Schenker's theories at the local society of composers; for
this he has prepared classroom-size enlargements of voice-leading graphs of a Bach prelude
and a Schubert waltz, and has proved a surprisingly competent and persuasive
speaker.

On the point of departing for the Riviera with his brother-in-law – possibly
via Vienna – Violin asks Schenker to make a quick assessment of his voice-leading reduction
of Bach's first Two-Part Invention, in C major.

Offers New Year greetings; reports on his current mood, on the Conservatory, his private
teaching, and publication plans. Describes Urlinie of C major Prelude from WTC I. Reports on
compositional activity and reading.

Hoboken compares performances of Beethoven's Missa solemnis by Furtwängler and
Klemperer. — He has experienced pains in his arm, and has taken recuperative lessons from
Rudolf Breithaupt. — He details work he has been doing for the Photogramm Archive, work of
his own, and that for Schenker.

Schenker summarizes the achievements and ambitions of several of his pupils
and followers (Albersheim, Cube, Vrieslander, Roth, Jonas, and Weisse), noting that Weisse
is the most ambitious of all of these though he is not completely at home in the new theory.
He fears that something might go wrong at Weisse's forthcoming lecture at the Central
Institute for Music Education, and hopes that Violin will listen with a sharp ear. Weisse
will give a trial run of the lecture at the Schenkers' apartment.

Jonas thanks Schenker for OJ 5/18, 4; — reports that his own essay and a review
of Das Meisterwerk III will appear in the Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft; — asks question
about a discussion in Der Tonwille of a Bach fugue copied out by Beethoven.

Schenker encloses the [Mozart calling] card, and sends an article from Der Kunstwart; he
emphasizes that Moriz Violin's new institute is a "school," not a "seminar," and offers detailed advice;
comments that his theory from Harmonielehre to Meisterwerk constitutes a self-contained whole; recommends use of
C. P. E. Bach's Versuch with his theory applied to the examples; and foretells the Urlinie-Tafeln that should be
available to Violin/Cub in Hamburg and to Weisse in New York. His eyes have suffered and need complete
rest.

Cube reports enrollment and quality of students at the Schenker Institute,
Hamburg; his own teaching is increasingly small-group-tuition based, drawing on Tonwille and
Meisterwerk. Karl Violin is recovering.

Angi Elias has made a fair copy of Cube's latest graph of the C major Prelude
(Wohltemperirtes Clavier, Book I), which Schenker may use in his seminar; Cube to write thanking
Elias; Schenker comments on changes to Cube's graph.

Jonas reports on his course on Schenker's theory at the Stern Conservatorium,
two forthcoming lectures, an article intended for publication, two radio talks and a radio
recital; includes reference to his later textbook Das Wesen des musikalischen
Kunstwerks.

Furtwängler liked his essay; Jonas describes his lectures at the Conservatory;
the situation with Einstein over publishing his review of Meisterwerk 3; asks about
permission to consult Brahms's arrangement of Saul.

Jonas reports on his visit to Berlin, where he failed to meet with Furtwängler; —
discusses Brahms-Handel Saul and Beethoven Op. 109. — He has heard about the Fünf Urlinie-Tafeln
from Hoboken and Salzer; — discusses plans for publishing his Das Wesen des musikalischen
Kunstwerkes. — Has received books from Alfred Einstein.

Cube reports on his current state of mind, his work on a Bach graph (commenting
on a graph by Angi Elias), promises to send an article on Schenker that has appeared in the
Frankfurter Zeitung, on the difficulties of the Schenker-Institut, and on Moriz and Karl
Violin.

Cube, in response to OJ 5/7a, [45], defends his choice of a descent from 3, with neighbor-note 4, in
his analysis of the first theme of Beethoven Op. 26, mvt 1, with graphs as "proof"; he also defends political
developments in Germany, and attributes his threatened hunger to Violin's return to Vienna.

Quotes part of a letter from the Reichsmusikkammer regarding grounds for his
dismissal, and reports subsequent conversation with the Conservatory administration.
Encloses review of a recent lecture. Includes revised Ursatz for Bach Prelude in body of
letter. Inquires about Hans Wolf, and reports on Furtwängler.